Whats best a bullet that passes through or one that reaches the backside of the hide ???

[PistonBroke]

In my opinion , you would want a bullet to stay inside the animal and reach the back side of the hide to ensure full hydrostatic shock and energy is kept inside the animal to create a quick humane kill.....what do you guys think , lets hear your opinions plz

[hal53]

Originally Posted by PistonBroke

In my opinion , you would want a bullet to stay inside the animal and reach the back side of the hide to ensure full hydrostatic shock and energy is kept inside the animal to create a quick humane kill.....what do you guys think , lets hear your opinions plz

in a perfect world, i would agree......

[BuckCuller]

I agree 100 and 10 percent.Shock wave em.

[elkhunter11]

The absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

the absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

i have to disagree with you on this one bro..why waste that energy to make it out that's energy that can be used inside to shock and awe them...lol only arrows i believe should be pass thoroughs...

[elkhunter11]

i have to disagree with you on this one bro..why waste that energy to make it out that's energy that can be used inside to shock and awe them...lol only arrows i believe should be pass thoroughs...

Unless the bullet badly damages the central nervous system,animals die because they bleed out. Good luck killing an elk or moose, or worse yet, a charging grizzly, via hydrostatic shock with your 270WSM. My favorite hunting bullets, the Barnes TSX/TTSX almost always exit, yet they kill as fast as any hunting bullet that I have ever used. A bullet designed to expand rapidly, but not to exit, doesn't always penetrate enough on larger game if heavy bone is struck.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

A bullet designed to expand rapidly, but not to exit, doesn't always penetrate enough on larger game if heavy bone is struck.

Which ones?

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

unless the bullet badly damages the central nervous system,animals die because they bleed out. Good luck killing an elk or moose, or worse yet, a charging grizzly, via hydrostatic shock with your 270wsm. My favorite hunting bullets, the barnes tsx/ttsx almost always exit, yet they kill as fast as any hunting bullet that i have ever used. A bullet designed to expand rapidly, but not to exit, doesn't always penetrate enough on larger game if heavy bone is struck.

i have killed moose with my 270 wsm with barnes tsx

[shortaction]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Unless the bullet badly damages the central nervous system,animals die because they bleed out. Good luck killing an elk or moose, or worse yet, a charging grizzly, via hydrostatic shock with your 270WSM. My favorite hunting bullets, the Barnes TSX/TTSX almost always exit, yet they kill as fast as any hunting bullet that I have ever used. A bullet designed to expand rapidly, but not to exit, doesn't always penetrate enough on larger game if heavy bone is struck.

Bang on!

I shot a 2 yr old bull moose last year at about 60 yds with a 300 WSM and 180 gr Accubonds. 1st shot he was walking broadside and I hit him through the lungs and he broke into a trot and I hit him again through the lungs. I was pretty certain both hits where good but he didn't show any signs at all other than picking up speed and he was heading towards some tough terrain so I put the 3rd one into the top of his shoulders and that put him down instantly. It all happen quickly and the bull only travelled about 40-60 yds during the 3 shots. Upon skinning it both bullets through the lungs where under the hide on the off side.

My point is that hydrostatic shock didn't provide any advantage in this situation and I really would prefer to use a tougher bullet that I have confidence to penetrate the vitals from poor angles.

[HunterDave]

I've been hunting with Nosler Ballistic Tips since starting to reload several years ago. The bullet goes in and doesn't come out on broadside shots resulting in bang-flops or deer that drop after 50 yds. They turn lungs into mush. I watched the gelatin tests on youtube and I'm quite confident that the bullets would be effective in the event of a shoulder shot through bone.

I know that it'll come up so I guess that I should mention that I am not overly concerned about any residual lead left over in the animals that I shoot.

[bdub]

I like an exit wound. More blood and easier tracking if it comes to that.

[SHORTMAG]

Originally Posted by PistonBroke

i have to disagree with you on this one bro..why waste that energy to make it out that's energy that can be used inside to shock and awe them...lol only arrows i believe should be pass thoroughs...

Based on your above supposition, would it not be better for the broad head to be inside the lung cavity, slicing and dicing...shocking and aweing the animal as it bounded away ?

Double blood trail is better than one ..isn't that what they teach in the bow course?...why would a bullet be any different than an arrow on a pass thru ?

For me, It's a no brainer. Shoot it thru the lungs...if it stays in, I get the recovered bullet...if it exits...Mother Nature gets it.
One hole or two, either way...I got my animal

[elkhunter11]

Which ones?

Try shooting an elk or moose through the shoulder with a 130gr Ballistic Tip out of a 270win or 270WSM, and tell me how you make out. My favorite bullet for deer,pronghorn and bighorn is the 140gr Ballistic Tip out of my 7mmstw, but I would not use that bullet on elk or moose, unless I was presented with a perfect broadside heart/lung shot. On the other hand, the 140gr TSX/TTSX easily penetrates both shoulders of an elk or moose if required.

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by shortmag

based on your above supposition, would it not be better for the broad head to be inside the lung cavity, slicing and dicing...shocking and aweing the animal as it bounded away ?

Double blood trail is better than one ..isn't that what they teach in the bow course?...why would a bullet be any different than an arrow on a pass thru ?

For me, it's a no brainer. Shoot it thru the lungs...if it stays in, i get the recovered bullet...if it exits...mother nature gets it.
One hole or two, either way...i got my animal :d

imo a bullet would kill quicker without passing through because of the retained energy inside the animal, a bullet that passes through is wasting all that hydrostatic shock that can be used .

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by shortmag

based on your above supposition, would it not be better for the broad head to be inside the lung cavity, slicing and dicing...shocking and aweing the animal as it bounded away ?

Double blood trail is better than one ..isn't that what they teach in the bow course?...why would a bullet be any different than an arrow on a pass thru ?

For me, it's a no brainer. Shoot it thru the lungs...if it stays in, i get the recovered bullet...if it exits...mother nature gets it.
One hole or two, either way...i got my animal :d

your right an arrow is better when it passes through as where a bullet is not, imo bullets create way more hydrostatic shock than an arrow and that's why imo they are best left inside as where an arrow can create 2 holes to allow bleed out cause they dont have the shock of a bullet.

[LongBomber]

Originally Posted by PistonBroke

i have to disagree with you on this one bro..why waste that energy to make it out that's energy that can be used inside to shock and awe them...lol only arrows i believe should be pass thoroughs...

The problem is that no one knows just how fast the bullet is going when it exits. If your looking at an exit speed of 600fps with a 180gr bullet, that is a whopping 143.9 ft-ibs of energy. At 400fps that 180gr would be down to 65ft-ibs. Started from a 30-06 it would have had roughly 3000 ft-ibs at the muzzle. I don't think that 60-150ft-ibs will make much of a difference.

Personally I will take two nice loonie size holes, one each side.

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by longbomber

the problem is that no one knows just how fast the bullet is going when it exits. If your looking at an exit speed of 600fps with a 180gr bullet, that is a whopping 143.9 ft-ibs of energy. At 400fps that 180gr would be down to 65ft-ibs. Started from a 30-06 it would have had roughly 3000 ft-ibs at the muzzle. I don't think that 60-150ft-ibs will make much of a difference.

Personally i will take two nice loonie size holes, one each side.

well of course it would make a difference,lol a 388 grain arrow at 340 fps creates 98 ft/lbs of energy, so that extra 60-150 ft/lbs would make that much of a difference, its like getting hit with that bullet and then an arrow to follow, that's gotta make some kind of difference i would think, imo

[muledeerking]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

Agree.. This is why I shoot bergers.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

X2......just an exit or just in the off-side hide are my favorites....BUT it is really hard to know if it was "just" an exit

This is how I like it....

Results.....

Notice bullet.....



Notice bullet removed....



LC

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

X2......just an exit or just in the off-side hide are my favorites....BUT it is really hard to know if it was "just" an exit



LC

ya i agree with you here LC...i like them just inside the hide myself as well...

[Lefty-Canuck]

Something to keep in mind....

One of the main reasons that the copper solids are used over in Africa is that the PH's want to ALWAYS HAVE AN EXIT....that way they can get their trackers on a animal if they are not able to recover it quickly....most places will make you pay for an animal whether you recover it or not. So if you shoot a zebra and they know you hit it and you do not recover it.....you pay for a zebra.

One of the highest chances of having an exit on an animal is to shoot a monometal solid design.....that expands to 1.5-2.0 times the starting diameter and punches right through....whether you hit bone of not.

I have killed many NA game with cup and core bullets....some exited and some didn't. I have had some "bang flops" and I have had some animals continue to try and get away.

Each shot from a rifle is a "beast unto its own"....meaning it is darn near impossible to take the same shot 2 times in a row and either expect the exact same results or observe the exact same results.....too many factors determine what that bullet and animal is going to do.

Heck my father pointed out to me one time that depending on whether an animal is inhaling or exhaling it can effect where the internal organs are placed in the chest cavity.....as the diaphram moves and the lungs fill or empty things move forward and back....you never see this in the field (animals breathing) but we have done "autopsies" on game and seen some neat results that you would not expect from a shot placement....

LC

[PistonBroke]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

X2......just an exit or just in the off-side hide are my favorites....BUT it is really hard to know if it was "just" an exit

This is how I like it....

Results.....

Notice bullet.....



Notice bullet removed....



LC

what kind of animal is that and is that a barnes bullet...?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by PistonBroke

what kind of animal is that and is that a barnes bullet...?

Whitetail doe shot at a hard quartering to angle from about ~250 yards with a 90gr ballistic tip shot out of a .240WBY with a muzzle velocity of around 3300-3350fps.

Bullet entered midline between the front shoulder blade and the neck, struck one lung....the heart....part of the other lung and ended up in the offside hide just in front of the flank, just pierced the diaphram and into the gut slightly.... if I recall correctly.

Deer turned and wheel and piled up under a spruce tree 15 yards from POI.

LC

[martinbns]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

Barnes TSX does exactly that, lots of internal damage and two holes for the blood and air to exit.

[odsixer]

Originally Posted by martinbns

Barnes TSX does exactly that, lots of internal damage and two holes for the blood and air to exit.

+1 Barnes bullets are simply devastating in my opinion, every good hit I've had with a Barnes behind a 30/06 have been DRT.(On Deer only, I have yet to take an Elk or Moose with one).

[Cowtown guy]

The whole hydrostatic shock thing is extremely misleading. The vast majority of this shock is created very shortly after the bullet enters the animal. The reality is that every animal experiences that shock. Watch the video of the barnes bullets ripping into the gelatin...
http://www.barnesbullets.com/videos/...V9_640x480.wmv
Is there any doubt that there is shock present? Hell no. Does it kill the animal? Hell no. It "temporarily" displaces tissue. What kills the animal is the massive trauma that the bullet causes. Without the trauma there is just a bunch of bruising that will hurt like the dickens. Maybe in a few hours or days that bruising would result in death but it would again be because the animal bleeds out.
I will take 2 exit holes every time. I have had 3 BT's fail to provide penetration for me. All were on deer. 2 out of a .257 Roberts and 1 from a .243 Win. Never again will I trust them. I may try the Bergers as they tend to open after being inside the animal a few inches.

[skidderman]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The absolute optimum bullet performance would be a bullet that makes a large wound channel , and then has just enough energy to exit.

I agree on this. Although not exiting is OK an animal like an elk can go a long way. Two holes to bleed out is better than one if for no other reason, tracking purposes.

[muledeerking]

Originally Posted by PistonBroke

In my opinion , you would want a bullet to stay inside the animal and reach the back side of the hide to ensure full hydrostatic shock and energy is kept inside the animal to create a quick humane kill.....what do you guys think , lets hear your opinions plz

I agree with you 100%. I have read on here that holes kill not shock. I call BS on that. I have watched animals get shot with them all. The best I have seen proformance says different than holes kill. That is why I stay way far away from monolithic bullets. I shoot bergers but have use alot of others that work great too.